Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41201865›Full record

ArticleMelanoma research2026

A deep learning-based radiomics model for noninvasive diagnosis of melanoma.

Zhejuan Tian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Melanoma research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Zhejuan TianDepartment of Dermatology, Xuchang Central Hospital Affiliated to Henan University of Science and Technology, Xuchang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To develop a noninvasive diagnostic model integrating deep learning and radiomics for improving the accuracy and clinical utility of early melanoma diagnosis. A total of 350 patients with cutaneous pigmented lesions admitted to our hospital between January 2022 and December 2024 were retrospectively enrolled and randomly divided into a training set ( n  = 245) and a validation set ( n  = 105) in a 7:3 ratio. Complete information were obtained for all patients. Univariate analysis was used to screen factors associated with malignant melanoma. Variables were refined using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression, and independent predictors were identified via multivariate Logistic regression. Random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), and K-nearest neighbors (KNN) models were constructed using Python 3.8.5 and the sklearn library. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results from univariate analysis and multivariate logistic analysis showed that lesion diameter, entropy (first-order statistic), long run emphasis, large area emphasis, wavelet contrast, wavelet energy, and the ResNet50-layer49 output were independent risk factors for malignant melanoma (all P  < 0.05). The AUC of the RF model (0.794) was significantly higher than that of the KNN algorithm model (0.755) and the SVM model (0.768), making it the optimal model. The RF model constructed based on deep learning-based radiomics features can be effectively applied to the noninvasive diagnosis of melanoma in patients with cutaneous pigmented lesions. Among these features, entropy (first-order statistic), long-run emphasis, and wavelet contrast are the key predictive indicators.

Indexed as

Deep LearningMelanomaSkin NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiomicsRetrospective Studiesdeep learningmelanomanoninvasive diagnosisradiomicsrandom forest

Identifiers

PMID41201865
PMCPMC12736409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.